Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Illin on behalf of the Bindal People #2 v State of Queensland [2024] FCA 1242 File number(s): QUD 503 of 2016
Judgment of: MCEVOY J
Date of judgment: 25 October 2024
Catchwords: NATIVE TITLE – application for amendment of claim – whether reconstituted claim group given a reasonable opportunity to participate in decision-making process – whether applicant is authorised to conduct amended claim – discussion of authorisation process under s 251B of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) – whether an order under s 84D of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) is appropriate – application refused
Legislation: Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ss 61, 84D, 251B
Cases cited: Akiba v Queensland (2010) 2024 FCR 1 Ashwin (on behalf of the Wutha People) v Western Australia and Others (No 4) (2019) 369 ALR 1 Bolton on behalf of the Southern Noongar Families v State of Western Australia [2004] FCA 760 Champion on behalf of the Marlinyu Ghoorlie Claim Group v State of Western Australia (No 2) [2022] FCA 65 Doctor on behalf of the Bigambul People v State of Queensland (No 2) [2013] FCA 746 Gomeroi People v Attorney General of New South Wales [2017] FCA 1462 Mann on behalf of the Bigambul People #2 v State of Queensland [2023] FCA 450 Miller v State of South Australia (Far West Coast Sea Claim)(No 2) [2018] FCA 599 Nona on behalf of the Badu People (Warral and Ului) v State of Queensland [2020] FCA 983 Weribone v Queensland [2013] FCA 255 Wyman v Queensland (2015) 235 FCR 464
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate